(32), and treatment failures of up to 25% have been reported (12, 13). Difluoromethylornithine (DFMO) (Ornidyl) requires a 2-week therapy regimen which is difficult to administer in rural clinics (34). A new combination therapy with DFMO and oral nifurtimox (NECT) reduces the dose time to 1 week but still requires intravenous (i.v.) dosing (35).Antigenic variation is frequent, rendering prospects for vaccine development impracticable (22,27). What is urgently needed is a safe, orally (p.o.) administered drug, effective against both stages 1 and 2 of HAT, which then eliminates the need for staging and raises the potential for the eradication of sleeping sickness. Toward this aspiration, we have identified a class of boron-containing compounds, oxaborole carboxamides, as novel leads that show potent and selective trypanocidal activity in vitro. Two examples chosen from this lead series are AN3520 and SCYX-6759. These compounds exhibit rapid,

BackgroundAdverse drug reactions (ADRs) represent a major burden on the healthcare system. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients are particularly vulnerable to ADRs because they are usually on multiple drug regimens, have multiple comorbidities, and because of alteration in their pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic parameters. Therefore, one step towards reducing this burden is to identify patients who are at increased risk of an ADR.ObjectiveTo develop a method of identifying CKD patients who are at increased risk for experiencing ADRs during hospitalisation.Materials and MethodsFactors associated with ADRs were identified by using demographic, clinical and laboratory variables of patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 (estimated glomerular filtration rate, 10–59 ml/min/1.73 m2) who were admitted between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2012, to the renal unit of Dubai Hospital. An ADR risk score was developed by constructing a series of logistic regression models. The overall model performance for sequential models was evaluated using Akaike Information Criterion for goodness of fit. Odd ratios of the variables retained in the best model were used to compute the risk scores.ResultsOf 512 patients (mean [SD] age, 60 [16] years), 62 (12.1%) experienced an ADR during their hospitalisation. An ADR risk score included age 65 years or more, female sex, conservatively managed end-stage renal disease, vascular disease, serum level of C-reactive protein more than 10 mg/L, serum level of albumin less than 3.5 g/dL, and the use of 8 medications or more during hospitalization. The C statistic, which assesses the ability of the risk score to predict ADRs, was 0.838; 95% CI, 0.784–0.892).ConclusionA score using routinely available patient data can be used to identify CKD patients who are at increased risk of ADRs.

Aims To compare the baseline characteristics, pharmacological treatment, and in‐hospital outcomes across hospitalized heart failure (HF) patients with preserved LVEF (HF‐PEF) and those with reduced LVEF (HF‐REF). Method and results This was a prospective analysis of consecutive patients admitted with decompensated HF at two government hospitals in the United Arab Emirates, from 1 December 2011 to 30 November 2012. Multivariate factors of HF‐PEF vs. HF‐REF included elevated systolic blood pressure [odds ratio (OR) 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01–1.03], heart rate (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.97–0.99), age (OR 1.02; 95% CI 1.01–1.04), female sex (OR 2.38; 95% CI 1.41–4.03), angina or myocardial infarction (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.25–0.71), AF (OR 1.82; 95% CI 1.05–3.15), COPD or asthma (OR 2.80; 95% CI 1.47–5.35), Charlson Comorbidity Index score (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.64–0.88), and anaemia (OR 2.97; 95% CI 1.64–5.38). In‐hospital outcomes were similar between the two groups. However, patients with HF‐PEF were less likely to be prescribed HF medication, and used more anticoagulants and fewer antiplatelet medications. Conclusion These results suggest that patients with HF‐PEF are older, more often female, and have higher prevalence of respiratory diseases and AF. Compared with developed countries, hospitalized HF patients in the Middle East are 10 years younger and have a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus, and the majority have HF‐REF.

BackgroundAnticoagulation therapy is usually required in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) for treatment or prevention of thromboembolic diseases. However, this benefit could easily be offset by the risk of bleeding.ObjectivesTo determine the incidence of adverse outcomes of anticoagulants in hospitalized patients with CKD, and to compare the rates of major bleeding events between the unfractionated heparin (UFH) and enoxaparin users.MethodsOne year prospective observational study was conducted in patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 (estimated GFR, 10–59 ml/min/1.73 m2) who were admitted to the renal unit of Dubai Hospital. Propensity scores for the use of anticoagulants, estimated for each of the 488 patients, were used to identify a cohort of 117 pairs of patients. Cox regression method was used to estimate association between anticoagulant use and adverse outcomes.ResultsMajor bleeding occurred in 1 in 3 patients who received anticoagulation during hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 4.61 [95% confidence interval [CI], 2.05–10.35]). Compared with enoxaparin users, patients who received anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin had a lower mean [SD] serum level of platelet counts (139.95 [113]×103/µL vs 205.56 [123] ×103/µL; P<0.001), and had a higher risk of major bleeding (HR, 4.79 [95% CI, 1.85–12.36]). Furthermore, compared with those who did not receive anticoagulants, patients who did had a higher in-hospital mortality (HR, 2.54 [95% CI, 1.03–6.25]); longer length of hospitalization (HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.01–1.06]); and higher hospital readmission at 30 days (HR, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.10–2.91]).ConclusionsAnticoagulation among hospitalized patients with CKD was significantly associated with an increased risk of bleeding and in-hospital mortality. Hence, intensive monitoring and preventive measures such as laboratory monitoring and/or dose adjustment are warranted.

Objectives Remdesivir is one of the most widely recommended and used medications for COVID-19 treatment. However, different outcomes have been reported for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 treated with remdesivir. Specifically, the effect of the timing of remdesivir initiation (from patient’s symptom onset) on clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients has not been investigated. Methods This is a retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and treated with or without remdisivir. The primary outcome was patient’s recovery rate, defined as clinical improvement and patient’s discharge by day 14 of symptom onset. The secondary outcome was the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, and mortality within 28 days of patient’s symptom onset. Results Out of 323 hospitalized adults with COVID-19, 107 (33.1%) received no remdesivir during their hospital stay, 107 (33.1%) received remdesivir early within 7 days of the symptom onset, and 109 (33.7%) received it at 8 days or later of symptom onset. At day 14 following symptom onset, higher proportion of patients recovered in the early remdesivir compared to the late remdesivir cohort, or patients who did not receive remdesivir (adjusted odds ratio, aOR, 2.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31 to 5.35). Moreover, early administration of remdesivir was associated with lower admission to intensive care unit (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.64), less need for mechanical ventilation (aHR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.51), and lower mortality at 28 days (aHR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.53), as compared to the late remdesivir cohort or patients who did not receive remdesivir. Conclusion Early administration of remdesivir within 7 days of symptom onset is associated with less need for mechanical ventilation and lower 28-days mortality.